If World War 2 had never happened....

[21C101]

What would have happened to the railways.

My guess is that the following might have occured.

* Rapid rise in car/lorry use in the 1940s that occurred in the 1960s

* No nationalisation of whole industry.

* Closure of an awful lot of branch lines, but not in a national programme, the process had already started in the 1930s with some branches going and others like the Lambourn branch which GWR introduced railcars on in the 30s to avoid renewing the track as operational costs were covered but new track would have meant closure.

On Southern, kent coast electrification in '40s and dieselisation east of the south Western Main line.

* Enthusiastic bustitution of sunday and evening branch/secondary services as the railways had 49% shares in bus companies

* Electrification of the Great Central at 1500v d.c.

* Nearly new Bulleid pacifics being sold to other railways at home and abroad as Southern dieselised all non electrified lines with thumpers or co-co locos by end of the 40s.

* Closure of Southern route to Plymouth and local stations on Barnstaple line but lines to Bideford, Ilfracombe, Bude and Padstow survive thanks to retention of through services and capital grants

* Bankruptcy of LNER followed by massive closures by administrators.

* Railways put up far more of a fight to retain freight owning and operating lorry fleets including for lorry only journeys and integrating.


I'm sure there are thousands of others.

 

[Galvanize]

No Green Belt legislation to stop things like the Northern Heights project beyond Edgware to Bushey Heath, or the extension from Chessington South to Leatherhead...

Indeed the railway map around London alone might look completely different today had the Green Belt not come along after the war...

 

[21C101]

No Green Belt legislation to stop things like the Northern Heights project beyond Edgware to Bushey Heath, or the extension from Chessington South to Leatherhead...

Indeed the railway map around London alone might look completely different today had the Green Belt not come along after the war...

Not to mention the town and country planning act.

My gut feeling is that some sort of similar legislation would have happened but far less restrictive. The 1930's free for all was partly caused by the abolition of copyhold in 1929.

Prior to 1929 most non lease property/land was copyhold, held by an entry in the Lord of the Manors register. It was much the same as Freehold with the exception that the Lord of the Manor had a right to veto the sale if he didn't approve of the person buying the property or land so he enforced a sort of planning control and could block developers from buying land - or lower order oiks buying a property on his manor, even if they had the money!

 

[Yew]

More railfreight, the ex-army trucks and lorries available after ww2 would have reduced the amount of small, independent, hauliers, that eventually became large companies.


I wonder how it would have effected the steam age, would it have ended sooner, due to money that was spent on repairs, being available for an electrification program?

Definately an interesting concept however!

 

[yorksrob]

On Southern, kent coast electrification in '40s and dieselisation east of the south Western Main line.

* Enthusiastic bustitution of sunday and evening branch/secondary services as the railways had 49% shares in bus companies

* Electrification of the Great Central at 1500v d.c.

* Nearly new Bulleid pacifics being sold to other railways at home and abroad as Southern dieselised all non electrified lines with thumpers or co-co locos by end of the 40s.

* Closure of Southern route to Plymouth and local stations on Barnstaple line but lines to Bideford, Ilfracombe, Bude and Padstow survive thanks to retention of through services and capital grants

Assuming the Southern and Great Western remained independent, I think it's unlikely the Southern would have closed it's main line link to the key City in the South West.

Overall, more electrification earlier on the Southern. A fair few projects on hold might have gone ahead. The new Euston (which from pictures I've seen, would have looked a bit Eastern Block for my taste). Dare I say it, the Dawlish avoider.

Nice picture of the proposed new Euston here:

http://www.eustonarch.org/history.html

 

[Helvellyn]

I suspect a flyover would have been byuilt by the Southern at Woking, as the land was set aside and it was one of the few remaining flat junctions on the South Western Mainline.

 

[ianhr]

Assuming the Southern and Great Western remained independent, I think it's unlikely the Southern would have closed it's main line link to the key .

Overall, more electrification earlier on the Southern. A fair few projects on hold might have gone ahead. The new Euston (which from pictures I've seen, would have looked a bit Eastern Block for my taste). Dare I say it, the Dawlish avoider.



http://www.eustonarch.org/history.html

I think the Bulleid/Raworth electric locomotives were intended as prototypes for possible future mainline 3rd rail electrification to Bournemouth & the Kent Channel ports, which may well have come a lot earlier with loco haulage in preference to EMUs.
On the LNER the Manchester-Sheffield/Wath and Liverpool Street -Shenfield schemes would have been completed much earlier (mid-1940s) and possibly spawned extensions by 1950.

The LMS & GWR were rather conservative in their traction policies although the GWR may well have been the first to go for widespread dieselisation.

 

[21C101]

Assuming the Southern and Great Western remained independent, I think it's unlikely the Southern would have closed it's main line link to the key City in the South West.

http://www.eustonarch.org/history.html

I must admit until recently I would have agreed with you, until I found that they had imposed a maximum speed limit of 40mph south of Bridestowe all the way to Plymouth to save on P'way costs as early as the 1920s.

Seems the line was basically a basket case once the boat train traffic went before world war 1.

That said the destruction of Devonport in bombing and confiscation of the entire town centre by the navy after world war 2 didnt help.

I suppose they may have left a single line in place freight only. Certainly they wouldn't have shut Tavistock. Maybe they might even have electrified Tavistock to Plymouth for the commuter service which was half hourly in the peaks right up to the day the line shut!

I'm sure though they would have done a lot more to retain and develop holiday traffic to the North Devon resorts. In fact if the Barnstaple line went back to SWT with through services to Waterloo (as might happen given it is going class 158 soon and will no longer be able to run to Exmouth), I could actually see SWT grasping that north Devon resort nettle, given that Stagecoach also run buses from Barnstaple Station to Ilfracombe, Westward Ho and Appledore every twenty minutes, and to Braunton and Bideford every 10 minutes, seven days a week, with late evening services up to midnight.

 

[Abpj17]

Without WW2, it's difficult to know what relations with France and Germany would be like today. Given their state and private companies build a lot of the railway stock, maintain it, and operate it), privatisation, if any could look very different.

 

[Springs Branch]

Interesting question.
I've enjoyed several "alternate history" novels in the past, but these generally focus on events if Germany had won WW2, not that the War never happened.

Massive conflicts always accelerate progress in many areas such as social change and science & technology development.
So a quick think suggests, without WW2, we would have .....

UK society in general:
1) No large-scale nationalisation of big industries in late 1940s.
2) The old Establishment may have hung onto more of its power for longer with slower & less extensive implementation of 1950-70s-era socialism.
3) No 1950s Baby Boom and lower UK population than present.
4) Slower progress for women into higher education, equal employment etc.
5) A less extensive NHS and Welfare system compared to their present form and no big-bang establishment of "plate glass" post-war universities.
6) Slower, steadier development of many electronic industries and computing. Most modern developments would probably occur eventually, though maybe in a slightly different form.
7) Without a Global War, USA maintained an isolationist policy for longer, with slower spread of American culture around the world (but an unstoppable force nonetheless).
8) No idea how Germany & UK would have related and what sort of European Union / Common Market might have developed without WW2.
9) The British Empire would have lasted a bit longer, but independence and de-colonisation would have come about eventually.

Overall and on average I'd guess society would be around 20 years behind where we are today. Which has good and bad aspects.

On the Railways:
1) Modernisation projects planned by Big 4 in the late 1930s would have gone ahead - colour light signalling on main lines, 1500V DC electrification on LNER, more 3rd rail on Southern etc.
2) Glamour of 1930s long-distance express rail travel would have persisted into the 1940s and beyond. Would streamlined diesel locos have appeared as a marketing tool, as in USA? Maybe UK railway managements were too conservative for something as flashy as this.
3) Maybe a period with two different main line electrification systems - 1940s era 1500V DC on "LNER" East Coast and new 25kV AC on the "LMS's" West Coast lines, before eventual conversion & standardisation on 25kV outside the Southern Railway area.
4) Maybe a period with some 1500V DC but no new 25kV AC, on account of several Big 4 companies being unable to fund the required investment themselves in 1950s or 60s.
5) Wagonload rail freight suffers earlier competition from road haulage due to construction of more East Lancs Road-type schemes in the 1940s then an earlier start on Motorway construction, mimicking the success of our good friends & economic competitors in Germany with their autobahns.
6) Development of the jet engine for aircraft may have been slower (but would obviously happen eventually). This means cheap air travel for the masses might have started 20 years later, meaning another couple of decades thriving business for British seaside resorts and their accompanying holiday trains.
7) No post-war problems with lack of foreign exchange and less nervousness about security of imported fuel might have meant dieselisation was a feature of a different 1950s Modernisation Plan and the last new steam loco was built significantly earlier than Evening Star
8) Many city centre railway stations damaged by Nazi bombs might still have their roofs and original buildings.

 

[Abpj17]

As it's intrinsicaly linked, what about the development of London - would we have DLR? Would the suburbs have grown more quickly or more slowly? Would London be even more powerful as a financial services hub (without competition from Paris, Frankfurt)?
Would the regional cities have managed to keep up with London more or less?
Would we have a Channel Tunnel? (sooner, later, not at all?)

 

[DarloRich]

I think that if the second world war had not happened changes to our railway infrastructure would be the least of our concerns!

 

[Bevan Price]

1. Labour would probably have won the 1940 General Election. Nationalisation might have happened earlier - say by 1943/1944.

Assuming no early nationalisation, though::-

2. The Southern electrification schemes of the 1930s would have continued, with Kent Coast schemes completed by 1945/1946. There would probably have been few, if any, Bulleid Pacifics. 3rd rail electrification would have reached Bournemouth & Weymouth by the late 1950s, with Salisbury (and possibly Exeter) also been included. DMUs would probably have been introduced at the time this actually happened, but would have spread more rapidly onto secondary lines / branches.

3. LNER suburban electrification would have occurred earlier, Liverpool Street lines being converted by 1945/1950, followed almost immediately by Kings Cross suburban services. The Woodhead scheme would have been completed by 1945. All at 1500 V DC.

However, whilst Gresley was alive, he opposed main line electrification - indeed, but for Gresley, the Raven NER proposal to electrify York - Newcastle - Edinburgh would probably have been done before 1930. After Gresley died (1941), the LNER might have contemplated main line electrification if they considered the Woodhead "experiment" to have been a success.

4. On the LMSR, Stanier would not have been drafted onto "war" work, and remained in control of motive power for several more years. He would have accelerated replacing pre-LMS stock for a few years, mainly with existing steam designs, and maybe a few improved designs, such as his proposed 4-6-4. The early protoype diesels (10000/10001) would probably have been built, but the LMSR would have watched to see if LNER main line electrification was a success - and if it was, electrification of WCML & MML might have proceeded by the early 1950s, rather than adopt diesel operation.

5. GWR was a law unto itself, and would have continued largely unchanged, although GWR super-railcars (diesel) would have spread widely onto many secondary lines. Diesel locos would still have been diesel hydraulic, based on German designs, but all would have been built at Swindon. If air-conditioned coaches & ETH were introduced, these would be fed from a small diesel generator in a brake van, rather than take power from the locomotive.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

The economics of the railways - bruised by the Great Slump from 1929 - were slightly improved by the slow recovery of he mid to late 1930's - but only really in the "booming" SE with it's new emphasis on consumer goods (Think Ultra Radio at Park Royal- and of course the democratic spread of new cars) - rearmament from around 1938 boosted some of the older industries to an extent (steel making in particular) - but the overall picture was poor - the Southern made the best return thanks tot he Southern Electric network , cheap expansion at an affordable cost - but the other 3 were patchy to say the least - the LNER (despite the allure of the Streamliners) - being worst due to a depressed East Anglia (think imported food) and the decline of the North East. A plan to give the railways less control on fare fixing etc "The Square Deal Campaign" was a flop - and war actually prolonged the Big 4. UK was the last major nation to nationalise post war - something which was really inevitable - as much of the service offer (the LMS suburban services being renowned for filth and decay - due to lack of investment and no money for much else than operation) - was not competitve in the Bakelite and art-deco era. WW2 and Austerity Britain actually prolonged the status quo as there was no money post war - and previous few materials to even catch up on repairs.

 

[tbtc]

Interesting question!

One point not really touched on so far is that no war would have meant our industrial cities wouldn't have been destroyed which would have meant that the inner city ring roads/ urban motorways/ dual carriageways that cut a swathe through Glasgow/ Newcastle/ Leeds/ Manchester/ Liverpool etc wouldn't have been built (or would have been a lot hard to build, if they involved demolishing thousands of houses)...

...which would have meant that these "provincial" cities would have become/remained as dependent upon rail as London is. Maybe, without the 1950s planners having a "blank sheet of paper" we wouldn't have seen tram networks ripped up either.

Plus without the need for slum clearance to be done (at such a fast rate), we may not have seen so many car-friendly "new towns"/ garden cities built - which made rail unattractive.

 

[Helvellyn]

1. Labour would probably have won the 1940 General Election.

My understanding is that the Conservatives were widely expected to win the election due in 1940.

 

[edwin_m]

Interesting question!

One point not really touched on so far is that no war would have meant our industrial cities wouldn't have been destroyed which would have meant that the inner city ring roads/ urban motorways/ dual carriageways that cut a swathe through Glasgow/ Newcastle/ Leeds/ Manchester/ Liverpool etc wouldn't have been built (or would have been a lot hard to build, if they involved demolishing thousands of houses)...

...which would have meant that these "provincial" cities would have become/remained as dependent upon rail as London is. Maybe, without the 1950s planners having a "blank sheet of paper" we wouldn't have seen tram networks ripped up either.

Plus without the need for slum clearance to be done (at such a fast rate), we may not have seen so many car-friendly "new towns"/ garden cities built - which made rail unattractive.

I think in Britain only a few places such as Plymouth and Coventry had their centres totally flattened. In other cities, judging by the amount of older buildings that are left nearby there was still a lot of demolition needed to build the roads. With the attitudes of the 50s-70s I think they would have happened anyway.

Trams were already on the way out before WW2 in most of the UK, with many networks closing in the 30s when the infrastructure installed at the turn of the century was worn out and trams were seen as obstructions to the growing amount of motor traffic. If anything WW2 prolonged the life of the survivors, as there was no funding to buy replacement buses and a shortage of oil to fuel them.

On this note it's interesting to see that most cities in Germany retained and developed their trams after WW2. I wonder if that was a consequence of more of them genuinely being flattened by more effective Allied bombing later in the war, allowing space to be reserved for a more comprehensive re-planning which segregated the trams from other traffic.

 

[21C101]

My understanding is that the Conservatives were widely expected to win the election due in 1940.

Given this, it brings forth quite an interesting question.

Undoubtably the 1930s road building would have continued and expanded.

Undoubtably the Southern would have laid third rail and dieselised and the Western dieselised.

But wherefore LNER and LMS. LNER was virtually bankrupt in 1939 and LMS not far behind.

Would we have seen bankruptcy of those two followed by administrators shutting down secondary routes and branch lines wholesale overnight?

Or would we have seen the GWR, LMS and LNER nationalised with the Southern left in private hands, perhaps later to be nationalised as a separate entity (as London Transport was)?

 

[DarloRich]

Interesting question:

Do you mean imagine what would have happened had Hitler NOT risen to power in Germany
or
Imagine what would have happened has UK and allies followed the line suggested by Halifax and sought terms after Dunkirk
or
The British Empire took no part in the great ideological war OF 1937/8/9 - 19......

I think each scenario leads to different What if outcomes

 

[341o2]

The Southern planned to build its own station Riverside alongside St David's at Exeter, in order to stop going over GWR tracks the war put paid to these plans

Bristol tramways was so badly damaged in an air raid that the trams never ran again

The London tram to trolleybus conversion plan was halted in 1940, the last batch were originally destined for South Africa but not shipped due to attascks on Allied shipping, and in 1944 LT announced that no more trolleybuses (apart from eventuaLreplacement of the original LUT fleet plus those lost to air raids) surviving trams were replaced by motorbuses

I believe the Bullied pacifics would still have been built, there was criticism of the SR in building new express passenge locomotives when we were at war. Bullied in fact was trying to prolong the life of steam with an ultimate goal of electrification and would he have stayed on as he resigned over nationalisation of the railways

 

[Bevan Price]

Interesting question:

Do you mean imagine what would have happened had Hitler NOT risen to power in Germany
or
Imagine what would have happened has UK and allies followed the line suggested by Halifax and sought terms after Dunkirk
or
The British Empire took no part in the great ideological war OF 1937/8/9 - 19......

I think each scenario leads to different What if outcomes

That could lead to endless discussions and possibilities.

For example:
1. The seeds of some extremists taking over Germany probably arose from the severe financial punishment imposed on Germany after World War 1. Whether or not WW2 would have occurred is debatable, but there would almost certainly have been a long "cold war" situation, with huge defence spending, and a bare minimum of resources for anything else (including railways.)

2. If UK had followed Halifax, we would quite probably have been deceived, and a SS army of occupation would have taken control within a year or two. UK would have been exploited and enslaved for many years, until the Nazi regime collapsed in Germany. UK investment would have been low - maybe a few token prestige schemes to impress the rest of the world (i.e. USA). And millions of UK citizens would probably have been murdered by the SS.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

A large number of high ranking railway employees resigned - or retired , over the 1948 nationalisation plans. They felt somewhat out of place after the war - maybe unappreciated for their (and their staff) efforts - and not liking the centralisation of what turned out to be an ideological , yet financially and resource bust BTC - in turn controlled rigidly by the Cripps / Atlee Government. Not easy times for all.

Anyway - if WW2 had not happened there would have not much investment - massive and earlier branch line / duplicate line closures way before Beeching (remember there were no real public interest governance in those days) - the Big 4 were quite generous in running unprofitable social purpose services against the inexorable tide of buses and cars / lorries. In a way - despite the hard work and grime - WW2 was the railways finest hour !

 

[ExRes]

There were enormous advances made in both the motor and aircraft industries due entirely to the fact that the war took place, if there had been no war then would any of these had taken place ?

Without advances elsewhere the railway would have remained the dominant force and nationalisation would have been unlikely, what government would have tried to take on the big industrial boys when there was no actual need ?

 

[ChiefPlanner]

There were enormous advances made in both the motor and aircraft industries due entirely to the fact that the war took place, if there had been no war then would any of these had taken place ?

Without advances elsewhere the railway would have remained the dominant force and nationalisation would have been unlikely, what government would have tried to take on the big industrial boys when there was no actual need ?

The trouble is that the "Big 4" - though not bankrupt - were struggling financially - wafer thin margins and not enough cash to really invest in modernisation of the better bits of their operations.Not to say there were not some excellent initiatives by all partners. Remember they were bound to pay some dividends to shareholders as private operators - another struggle to manage on top of tricky and in many cases declining revenue flows. France took on the Ouest as a state run organisation as far back as around 1909 (I think) - and the rest in 1937 , the Germans after WW1 (with some financial jiggery-pokery) nationalised to effectively protect employment..I suspect the UK would have done much the same , by say 1945 - without the war and rationalised a good bit to save the more renumerative / promising bits. Even in the 19thC - some politicians were in favour of doing this.

 

[phil281]

The London Underground Northern Line would have been very different and more extensive today if it wasn't for WW2.

The Northern Heights project would have been completed, Northern Line trains would have run to Bushey Heath both via Mill Hill East and Golders Green and the Northern Line would have taken over the Alexandra Palace Branch too.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-...12/Northern%20Heights%20area%20tube%20map.jpg

Also, an 'express tunnel' from Clapham Common would have run parralell up the Charing Cross branch. This would have solved todays cronic overcrowding on the southern part of the northern line and sped journey times up. Shame it wasn't completed after WW2 or isn't considered today.

http://underground-history.co.uk/shelters.php

 

[341o2]

I thought the Northeren Heights project was abandoned as a result of introduction of the Greenn Belt - no more housing developmenmt hence no need for additional lines rathed thaan a consequence of WW2

No WW2 no Battle of Britian so what would the eastern section Bullied pacifics be named after?

If Bullied had not resigned over the 1948 nationalisation of the railways ( a consequnce of WW2) would Leader have properly got off the ground, even to enter service

 

[edwin_m]

I thought the Northeren Heights project was abandoned as a result of introduction of the Greenn Belt - no more housing developmenmt hence no need for additional lines rathed thaan a consequence of WW2

Work was suspended due to WW2 with construction under way on several sections. So presumably if the war hadn't started the lines would have been completed, and if green belts had still been introduced this area would not have been part of one.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If Bullied had not resigned over the 1948 nationalisation of the railways ( a consequnce of WW2) would Leader have properly got off the ground, even to enter service

With the problems that affected "Leader", I just wonder what time scale would have been needed to make this locomotive totally trouble-free?

 

[edwin_m]

With the problems that affected "Leader", I just wonder what time scale would have been needed to make this locomotive totally trouble-free?

Maybe it would have been ready in time to haul the inaugural service train on the Todmorden curve?

 

[341o2]

Work was suspended due to WW2 with construction under way on several sections. So presumably if the war hadn't started the lines would have been completed, and if green belts had still been introduced this area would not have been part of one.

Thanks for the confirmation, as you say the lines would have been completed prior to introduction of Green Belt policy - the Northern Heights abandonment after substantial work such as the stops under the road at Edgeware or the bridge designed to cross the main line at Finsbury Park en route to Alexandra Palace sat in a BR yard for several years before being scrapped - what a ,waste
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

With the problems that affected "Leader", I just wonder what time scale would have been needed to make this locomotive totally trouble-free?

True, but without the driving force of OVSB behind the project, the obvious conclusion was that the project was doomed. Surprising it got off the ground at all.

BR could not stomach the problems associated with the project, despite 36002 being 99% complete and would have benifited from lessons learned with the prototype and ordered that the project be abandoned forthwith